Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Faerl'Elghinn" data-source="post: 1547321" data-attributes="member: 17810">First, I'd like to state that role playing is alive and well in my neck of the woods.  I have been blessed with one of the most creative, animated, brilliant Dungeon Masters in the history of the game for the past 13 years, and his games are always enrapturing.  That said, allow me to present my opinion on the state of the game and the ineptitude of the vast majority of current DMs.  I read alot of stuff on here about DMs running "pumped up this" and "advanced that" against low-level parties, with ridiculous odds in favor of the monsters.  These people need to reevaluate the intent of the game.  It's not supposed to be the DM versus the players.  Any DM who doesn't have the ability to pull a TPK at any time he or she so chooses has obvious problems.  It's always up to the DM how difficult things will be, but what it really comes down to is how much fun the game is all around.  I'm sorry, but a 3rd-level party should not be facing 4 5th-level Ranger orcs unless it has some serious resources.  The game is weighted in favor of the PCs because that's the point.  PCs are supposed to survive.  The longevity of the PCs has a direct relationship with the overall fun and excitement of the game.  Players will be much more enthusiastic about playing characters to whom they have become strongly attached.  How can a person step into the role of a character when he or she can be relatively certain that his or character will be dead by the end of the session?First of all, the whole "EL" concept to me seems ridiculous.  How can it not be exactly twice as difficult to face twice as many monsters?  The answer is that it is objectively twice as difficult to face 2 monsters as it is to face one.  This can be demonstrated through the staggeringly complex equation: 1+1=2.  The math doesn't lie.  Another thing that strikes me as being intrinsically flawed about the 3.0/3.5 rules is the fact that, regardless of the number of members in a party, the party's average party level remains the same.  For example, a party of 2 3rd-level characters is considered to be exactly as powerful as a party of 10 3rd-level characters as far as the EL of an encounter the party should face.  How can this be?  The answer is that it can't.  The only correct way to determine a party's level is to add the total number of levels, and divide the sum by 4.  Not 4-6.  A party of 6 characters has exactly 1.5 times the resources as a party of 4 characters, and is therefore capable of facing 1.5 times as challenging an encounter.  I submit that a party should be awarded experience based on the number of members as well as the levels of each character as follows: The total number of members/4, divide each character's level by the result (i.e., In a party of 2 3rd-level characters, each character's level should count as 1.5), refer to the experience chart based on this number.  Dungeons & Dragons is a game of math, and somewhere along the line, the developers of its newest version seemed to have skipped first grade.Also, the EL of an encounter is only presented as a tool for discerning the power level of an encounter in relation to a party of a given level.  Experience is supposed to be awarded for each opponent individually, not based on the EL.  Sometimes this is in the party's favor, and sometimes not, but if the DM refuses to award the correct experience for an encounter, you have every right to recalculate it yourself and show him or her the correct number based on the rules.  If he or she still refuses to award you the correct amount of experience, get up and walk out.  You don't need to play in a game where the DM abuses his godlike power.  It is not recommended for a party to face an EL of more than 3 levels higher than the average party level, and even then only as the climax of a large adventure.  Conversely, the game quickly grows boring if the challenges faced by the PCs are too much weaker than the party can handle.  As a DM, it is your responsibility to ensure that most of the party survives most of the time, and that the challenges presented are of an appropriate power level.  Anything less is an abuse of your position, and you shouldn't be surprised if your players abandon you as a result.  TPKs or PPKs on a regular basis, especially as the results of random encounters or ambushes on the way to the main adventure, are simply not fun.  If a DM regularly presents challenges which are obviously beyond the abilities of your party, don't hesitate to express your displeasure, and encourage others to do so as well.  If such behavior persists, get up and walk out.  Invite everyone over to your house for a game you run yourself, but don't play with that DM anymore.  Some people just aren't cut out for it. Anyway, as far as the roleplay aspects of the game, it's generally mostly contingent upon the enthusiasm of the players in general, which is generally contingent upon the willingness of the DM to allow them to have fun.  As a player, it is your responsibility to play your character with the necessary energy, fleshing him or her out with a full-blown, individual identity.  DMs will generally hesitate to kill parties in which the characters are just flat-out fun to play.  For example, I have this Half-Orc who is a 1st-level Barbarian, 6th-level Sorcerer, and he is just an outright riot.  He wears nothing but a breechcloth, has a +1 Steel Pot for a helmet, and doesn't know the difference between Platinum and Silver.  He is illiterate, though he had the option of gaining literacy as a benefit of the Sorcerer class, and is therefore unable to use scrolls.  He speaks in broken common and fluent Orc, has his own voice and mannerisms, and once asked a veiled Medusa if she'd like to mate.  He sees her shapely form, and although I as a player know the nature of the creature, I decide that his natural reaction would be to walk up and say, "You want mate Schlugg?"  Luckily, I saved when she unveiled, proceeding to chop her head into mashed potatoes with green gravy.  That's roleplay, my friends, and it is the true heart of the Dungeons & Dragons game.  Its absence removes a vital aspect from the game itself, and without it I would advise sitting around and playing Monopoly (or better yet, Magic) instead.I can tell you from experience that Dungeon Masters range in ability from incredibly good to incredibly bad, but the majority fall somewhere in the middle.  Good DMs are those who aren't afraid to do a little acting, who can create and maintain reasonable challenges and settings, and who know when they've made a mistake as to the power level of a challenge.  The mark of a truly exceptional DM, however, is the ability to improvise when and wherever necessary.  A great DM will be able to completely drop his or her entire plan when the PCs decide they don't really want to go to the dungeon anymore, or to create a believable scenario on the spot which leaves the party no other alternative.  A great DM will just throw some side adventure into his campaign off the cuff, at the end of which lies some peculiar magic item which he or she has just spontaneously created.  A great DM will put a powerful but painfully cursed item behind a trapped secret door which isn't actually on the map.  Most of all, a great DM will recognize the fact that the game is supposed to be fun for everyone, not just for himself.  When the players are enjoying themselves, the DM will enjoy himself more.  May you all find the DM who hits your G-spot.-Faerl'Elghinn</blockquote>

Verification